[5.M0NSTER]

Low resolution stacks of dollar bills. Makes sense.

[antzcrashing]

https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tes...e-release-soon

If they do this so early, some people are going to get hurt. Its not ready if you can take your eyes off the road or jump out of the driver seat. The YouTube and tiktoks are coming

[GenXer]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Really, you don't just find it more relaxing to be in complete control of the vehicle rather than relying on the machine and have to be at the ready if it fucks up? What happens if (when) it puts you in a situation YOU can't get out of?

Sorry, I just don't get it.

You have full control at anytime with just a small input to the steering, gas pedal or brake. If anything the system responds quicker. I'm not a fan of the Google car with no steering wheel or brake either but having these driver assistant makes daily commute very relaxing.

[AnOldBiker]

If an accident or death occurs
If someone spams in and make changes
If fog in area
If rain in area
If sensor failure

To many possibles that makes me only go with human control only. And what if someone plows into my vehicle and injure or death occurs ? I sue the owner, the program company, the auto maker, Who ? How long will this drag out in court while it generates through the courts ?

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by AnOldBiker

If an accident or death occurs
If someone spams in and make changes
If fog in area
If rain in area
If sensor failure

To many possibles that makes me only go with human control only. And what if someone plows into my vehicle and injure or death occurs ? I sue the owner, the program company, the auto maker, Who ? How long will this drag out in court while it generates through the courts ?

I will base this on cases that have happened already, with tesla and uber, and my assumptions

If an accident or death occurs - blame the driver. They signed that they must be ready to take over at any time.
If someone spams in and make changes - no driving capabilities are accessible via remote systems only the local system. Use hackatons to prove it cant be done.
If fog in area - driver judgement call if safe, else take over.
If rain in area - driver judgement call if safe, else take over.
If sensor failure - critical sensor failure cause the system to stop, driver must take over

[AnOldBiker]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

I will base this on cases that have happened already, with tesla and uber, and my assumptions

If an accident or death occurs - blame the driver. They signed that they must be ready to take over at any time.
If someone spams in and make changes - no driving capabilities are accessible via remote systems only the local system. Use hackatons to prove it cant be done.
If fog in area - driver judgement call if safe, else take over.
If rain in area - driver judgement call if safe, else take over.
If sensor failure - critical sensor failure cause the system to stop, driver must take over

And I found out it is a fact that they want you to be alert, ready to assume control, make the judgement call to remove the control from the car to you, keep your eyes on the road and YOU are to blame for anything that happens .... WHY HAVE THE DAMN THING ... and be the one to pay for it ?

I believe it was three years ago, in Arizona, during a night test drive, a guy didn't have his eyes on the road, there was a thin layer of fog and the sensors could not see a person crossing the road and killed them. They are keeping the case quiet and were still in litigations the last I heard of it.

[freakystyly]

https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hacker...-jeep-highway/
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33650491
https://www.wired.com/2015/09/gm-too...s-onstar-cars/

This is super old by tech standards but it's a broad generalization to say that it isn't possible. There's also the whole On Star thing where your car can be shut down remotely (mostly seen in Hollywood).

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by AnOldBiker

And I found out it is a fact that they want you to be alert, ready to assume control, make the judgement call to remove the control from the car to you, keep your eyes on the road and YOU are to blame for anything that happens .... WHY HAVE THE DAMN THING ... and be the one to pay for it ?

I believe it was three years ago, in Arizona, during a night test drive, a guy didn't have his eyes on the road, there was a thin layer of fog and the sensors could not see a person crossing the road and killed them. They are keeping the case quiet and were still in litigations the last I heard of it.

Are you referring to the test program of uber? If so, that case was found the driver to be at fault and liable

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by freakystyly

https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hacker...-jeep-highway/
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33650491
https://www.wired.com/2015/09/gm-too...s-onstar-cars/

This is super old by tech standards but it's a broad generalization to say that it isn't possible. There's also the whole On Star thing where your car can be shut down remotely (mostly seen in Hollywood).

Let me rephrase, it is highly improbable (effectively impossible), if a smart design is applied to the software and OS. Jeep and GM applied foolish design to those cars and the probable occurred (disastrous remote control).

[GenXer]

How on earth can you stop a mechanically actuated hydraulic brakes from stopping. Only a few vehicles are pure brake-by-wire. You could potentially activate the brakes if such vehicle have adaptive cruise. I didn't know any 2010 Impala with such technology.

The only major concern I have with this type of electronic is the ability to turn off the vehicle at high speed. Such an occurrence can be done by the authorities asking OnStar to shut down your vehicle.

Additionally, you can be locked inside your vehicle in a late model Saab (before the company demise) if the alarm is activated. The locking mechanism, outside key tumbler and inside door handles are not connected! The vehicle under duress will lock itself, turn on the siren and leave anyone locked inside. Only a phone call to OnStar or if you have an actual electronic key fob could deactivate the alarm. Unlocking the outside key tumbler with an actual mechanical key does not deactivate the alarm nor does it unlock the vehicle. This is when you suspect your car has something to do with Skynet.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

Are you referring to the test program of uber? If so, that case was found the driver to be at fault and liable

Because the technology is not ready and still needs a person to over ride it, at which point it is not autonomous is it.

Madness. All of it. Absolute pipe dream.

[antzcrashing]

Video of Tesla's full self driving (FSD) software on a drive

https://twitter.com/tesla_raj/status...835409921?s=21

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by GenXer

You have full control at anytime with just a small input to the steering, gas pedal or brake. If anything the system responds quicker. I'm not a fan of the Google car with no steering wheel or brake either but having these driver assistant makes daily commute very relaxing.

But what happens when the autonomous system puts the vehicle in a situation that it is too late to recover from (by the human who takes over control) when the driver wasn't fully paying attention? Watching the car drive its self if far more tiring than actually having to drive it.

[freakystyly]

https://techcrunch.com/2020/12/02/au...afety-drivers/

What could go wrong?

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

But what happens when the autonomous system puts the vehicle in a situation that it is too late to recover from (by the human who takes over control) when the driver wasn't fully paying attention? Watching the car drive its self if far more tiring than actually having to drive it.

Most planes on autopilot will fly right into the ground on a ILS approach to a Decision Height if you do nothing.

[GenXer]

There will come a time when automated driving will be mandatory.
Like in the movie I, Robot.

Drivers will learn to depend on extra sensors on their vehicle similar to what a pilot relies on IFR. Granted there's a hell of a lot of space between each plane and there's hardly any on coming traffic.

I can see this in the future: You are being fined $1000 for failure to update your navigation firmware!

or

In the headline: a senior citizen turned off his autonomous driving this morning causing multiple car accident when trying to merge into traffic. He is being charged with vehicular felony.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by GenXer

There will come a time when automated driving will be mandatory.
Like in the movie I, Robot.

Drivers will learn to depend on extra sensors on their vehicle similar to what a pilot relies on IFR. Granted there's a hell of a lot of space between each plane and there's hardly any on coming traffic.

I can see this in the future: You are being fined $1000 for failure to update your navigation firmware!

or

In the headline: a senior citizen turned off his autonomous driving this morning causing multiple car accident when trying to merge into traffic. He is being charged with vehicular felony.

Lets face it though, we don't have the public transportation of Europe and other places, it was never designed into most cities and most places are just too far apart to make it practical (not everyone lives downtown). Being able to be mobile in your own car as you age and eventually get to the point where you can't drive will be a game-changer. My Dad is at that point and my Mom isn't far behind. Not having to go through that will be an amazing improvement to QOL.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Most planes on autopilot will fly right into the ground on a ILS approach to a Decision Height if you do nothing.

Right, but pilots are trained to use autopilot. Most crappy drivers who suck at driving in the first place, which is why they want a machine to do it for them, don't understand what the word autopilot means, so they let the car get itself into trouble. Plus, the ATC (and the co-pilot) is going to warn the pilot he is in error. No one is watching a Tesla (or any other autonomous car) driving in autopilot. That's the difference.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by GenXer

There will come a time when automated driving will be mandatory.
Like in the movie I, Robot.

Drivers will learn to depend on extra sensors on their vehicle similar to what a pilot relies on IFR. Granted there's a hell of a lot of space between each plane and there's hardly any on coming traffic.

I can see this in the future: You are being fined $1000 for failure to update your navigation firmware!

or

In the headline: a senior citizen turned off his autonomous driving this morning causing multiple car accident when trying to merge into traffic. He is being charged with vehicular felony.

Airplanes are just not flying around in the skies not running into each other because they are flying on auto pilot with extra sensors.

LOL.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Right, but pilots are trained to use autopilot. Most crappy drivers who suck at driving in the first place, which is why they want a machine to do it for them, don't understand what the word autopilot means, so they let the car get itself into trouble. Plus, the ATC (and the co-pilot) is going to warn the pilot he is in error. No one is watching a Tesla (or any other autonomous car) driving in autopilot. That's the difference.

Not really, you don't have to be trained on an autopilot to go buy an aircraft with it and fly it into the ground (or have it installed in your plane). There's no training requirement for that. You appear to maybe be talking about commercial passenger service or something, but even then most of what you said doesn't hold true. I'm talking about private operations, like private car drivers. You should follow the equipment manual, which most people do, but for sure some leave the AP on a little longer and get a little closer than they should. A few just let it take them right into the runwayor the side of a mountain. The only time you have to be "trained" on the autopilot is when you take your check-ride in an aircraft already equipped with it. That's not a requirement to get your instrument rating. After you get your rating, you are free to get one installed or go buy another airplane with it and there's no training requirement.

Also, ATC will not warn you if are about to hit the ground from blowing through the DH on autopilot. Their primary responsibility is aircraft separation, in terms of keeping aircraft from running into each other. DH is typically 200' above the runway. In those kinds of conditions, tower won't see the aircraft since visibility is so low. Approach control is the one looking primary at radar, but no one is going to notice anything out of the ordinary as you continue descending 500+ fpm past DH. In some situations, approach control and the tower look at the aircraft's position on the ILS very closely (simultaneous ILS approaches), but they are looking at lateral separation and course deviation, not descent past DH and by all accounts, your descent past DH on autopilot would look perfectly normal. It's only that last 100 feet or so where you do "the thing" to make it so touching the runway doesn't kill you. 500fpm impact is enough to kill you.

And relying on ATC to warn you of the ground when you are not landing works about as well as you think it would. In other words, landmark accidents where commercial airliners plowed into mountains led to more automation systems installed in the aircraft, namely TAWS.

There's no co-pilot when you are flying your bonanza, TBM or King Air.

There is a totally new level "hitting the ground avoidance" that has been designed into some aircraft now, already credited with saving some lives. A friend helped develop this system for the F-16. It's an automated system that will prevent the aircraft from being run into terrain/the ground. It will recover the aircraft if the pilot fails to.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Lets face it though, we don't have the public transportation of Europe and other places, it was never designed into most cities and most places are just too far apart to make it practical (not everyone lives downtown). Being able to be mobile in your own car as you age and eventually get to the point where you can't drive will be a game-changer. My Dad is at that point and my Mom isn't far behind. Not having to go through that will be an amazing improvement to QOL.

I am all for the ability to have my car drive me places. I am 0% for people telling me I cant drive my own car.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Not really, you don't have to be trained on an autopilot to go buy an aircraft with it and fly it into the ground (or have it installed in your plane). There's no training requirement for that. You appear to maybe be talking about commercial passenger service or something, but even then most of what you said doesn't hold true. I'm talking about private operations, like private car drivers. You should follow the equipment manual, which most people do, but for sure some leave the AP on a little longer and get a little closer than they should. A few just let it take them right into the runwayor the side of a mountain. The only time you have to be "trained" on the autopilot is when you take your check-ride in an aircraft already equipped with it. That's not a requirement to get your instrument rating. After you get your rating, you are free to get one installed or go buy another airplane with it and there's no training requirement.

Also, ATC will not warn you if are about to hit the ground from blowing through the DH on autopilot. Their primary responsibility is aircraft separation, in terms of keeping aircraft from running into each other. DH is typically 200' above the runway. In those kinds of conditions, tower won't see the aircraft since visibility is so low. Approach control is the one looking primary at radar, but no one is going to notice anything out of the ordinary as you continue descending 500+ fpm past DH. In some situations, approach control and the tower look at the aircraft's position on the ILS very closely (simultaneous ILS approaches), but they are looking at lateral separation and course deviation, not descent past DH and by all accounts, your descent past DH on autopilot would look perfectly normal. It's only that last 100 feet or so where you do "the thing" to make it so touching the runway doesn't kill you. 500fpm impact is enough to kill you.

And relying on ATC to warn you of the ground when you are not landing works about as well as you think it would. In other words, landmark accidents where commercial airliners plowed into mountains led to more automation systems installed in the aircraft, namely TAWS.

There's no co-pilot when you are flying your bonanza, TBM or King Air.

There is a totally new level "hitting the ground avoidance" that has been designed into some aircraft now, already credited with saving some lives. A friend helped develop this system for the F-16. It's an automated system that will prevent the aircraft from being run into terrain/the ground. It will recover the aircraft if the pilot fails to.

So you are saying that the FAA doesnt require you to specifically learn about autopilot during your training? Ok maybe. But doesnt mean any training school worth salt wont train you on it.

To obtain a private pilot certificate in the United States, you must be at least 17 years old and complete 35 flight hours in an FAA part 141-approved school, at minimum